I asked ChatGPT to do that exercise for me:

I find it deeply troubling to witness the erosion of true open source values within Red Hat, as outlined in the recent blog post by Mike McGrath. While he attempts to defend the company’s actions, it is clear that the fundamental principles of software freedom are being undermined.

Firstly, McGrath’s claims about Red Hat’s commitment to open source development are misleading. Mere code contributions upstream are not sufficient to embody the spirit of the free software movement. True dedication to freedom means liberating users by ensuring that the software they use respects their rights to study, modify, and share it. Unfortunately, Red Hat’s actions fall short of this ideal.

The emphasis on backporting patches and maintaining an operating system for extended periods is not inherently incompatible with open source values. However, it is the context in which these activities occur that matters. Red Hat’s increasing restrictions on downstream rebuilders and its reluctance to facilitate their efforts is a disservice to the community. By limiting the ability to freely modify and redistribute the software, Red Hat is erecting barriers that hinder innovation and impede the spirit of cooperation that open source should foster.

Furthermore, the dismissal of rebuilders as mere profit-seeking entities is a distortion of reality. These rebuilders play a crucial role in expanding the reach and accessibility of open source software. By disregarding their contributions, Red Hat is failing to recognize the diverse needs of users and the benefits that can arise from a vibrant ecosystem of downstream distributions.

The introduction of CentOS Stream as a replacement for CentOS raises concerns about the viability of a truly community-driven project. While Red Hat claims that the source code remains open, the increased control exerted by the company raises questions about the autonomy and independence of the project. This shift undermines the trust and collaboration that formed the foundation of CentOS and threatens to marginalize the very community that helped build it.

I implore Red Hat to reconsider its stance and recommit to the principles that once defined the company. Open source is not simply about code contributions; it is about empowering users and fostering a community of collaboration, transparency, and shared knowledge. Red Hat must embrace these values fully, or risk betraying the very essence of the open source movement it once championed. Only by upholding software freedom can we ensure a future where technology serves the best interests of all.

OK I don’t know what Tyson is

Jerboa is pretty good imo

What’s the context?

It’s decentralized. For instance, I posted a meme on memes@lemmy.ml but since my account was created on lemmy.fmhy.ml, the image was hosted there.

I asked ChatGPT but I don’t like its suggestions:

It’s great that you’re open to finding a suitable alternative to calling it “bedtime” for your niece. Here are a few suggestions you can consider:

1. “Restful Time”: This term emphasizes the importance of getting enough rest while still sounding more mature than “bedtime.”
2. “Dream Hour”: This phrase adds a touch of imagination and excitement to the idea of going to bed, making it a more appealing concept for your niece.
3. “Sleepy Time”: This option retains the focus on sleep but removes the “baby-ish” connotation, allowing your niece to associate it with relaxation and getting ready for a good night’s sleep.
4. “Night Routine”: This phrase focuses on establishing a regular evening routine, which includes winding down and preparing for sleep.
5. “Quiet Time”: This term emphasizes the need for a calm and peaceful atmosphere before going to bed, which can be appealing to your niece. It would be helpful to involve your niece in the decision-making process by explaining why you’re looking for an alternative term and asking her for any ideas she might have. By involving her in the discussion, you can find a term that both of you are comfortable with.